clear

Mixed-Messages

By Chris | May 28, 2008 |

Oil Executives of Politicians?

I have been linked to partisan politics in the past. That tends to happen when you run for elected office under a parties banner. Since I have learned that by being non-partisan you end up accomplishing more, that is the way I am staying. I am no longer a card-carrying member of any political party.

So this post is not being published to expose the weak links in any political parties platform. It is meant to show how the way our media and politicians act tends to confuse regular Joe/Anne Citizen. How are we supposed to sustainably deal with this supposed global “oil crisis” and proposed solutions to deal with aspects of it when we have our elected representatives advocating for cheaper gas prices? Here’s an excerpt (sorry for its length) from Windsor West MP Brian Masse’s question to the speaker of the house…

39th PARLIAMENT, 2nd SESSION
EDITED HANSARD • NUMBER 098

Monday, May 26, 2008

Emergency Debate - Energy Pricing

Mr. Brian Masse (Windsor West, NDP):
Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise and speak about this important subject matter.

An important thing to note in this debate is that we all agree there has to be a multitude of energy solutions for Canadians. Wind, solar, and a whole series of different proposals have been put out there and there is going to be added capacity to the market. However, there can be no doubt that we are still going to be living in a modern society that is going to be dependent upon oil and gasoline products for the foreseeable future.

As we bring new elements to the grid, we really need to debate how we are going to deal with the rapid escalation of an essential commodity that feeds our industries, heats our homes, and is required for daily living in Canada.

Coming from an automotive town, I have long been advocating for a change in the revolutionization of that industry to higher standards of fuel efficiency and less pollution. It has been very difficult to get some companies on board. Some have and some are now paying the consequences because of it. This debate today about energy pricing cannot be done without the contextual lens of what we are going to do with this commodity in our civil society.

The New Democratic Party has been calling for a public inquiry on this issue for over a year and it is consistent with what has been done in Parliament over the last number of years. Back in 2002, I was part of a panel on the industry committee that reviewed gasoline prices. It would have been good to have the industry minister speak tonight. I do not know if he is scheduled later on. Even back in 2002, there was a series of excuses that could be used for profiteering in the system and the speculative market, which costs Canadians, had no factual basis even on the price of gasoline.

When the price went up in 2002, and there was a concern, Parliament reconvened after it had recessed. The industry itself presented a series of arguments and people might remember these moments because they heard these excuses later on. At that time, the rapid escalation of prices was blamed on speculation in oil due to a looming war in Iraq. It was blamed on labour unrest in Venezuela, on the political crisis in Nigeria, on usually cold weather in northeastern North America, and on low inventory levels in North
America.

There has been discussion about the bill that was changed with the Competition Act, but at that time there was a recommendation for a petroleum monitoring agency. Ironically, even to this day, the Canadian Petroleum Products Institute does not have a problem with having a petroleum monitoring agency. We wanted to shed light on the issue so that consumers felt more empowered and there would be a direct accountability of a
government resource as opposed to relying on the industry itself to gather data and information.

We never saw that come to fruition. A change in the Competition Act was proposed. It came far too late in the process. We could have had it up and running at that time. Unfortunately, it did not pan out and there are some consequences.

If we fast forward to today, we hear some of the same excuses. They have come back again. I have a chart. When we reviewed this again in the industry committee, we had another kick at the can and looked at refining and market margins. It is interesting because the market operating margin is fairly consistent over a period of time with a few jumps.

What we have is refining operating margins significantly spiking with a series of events. If we look at the events: it is the Iraq invasion, the blackout, tight gasoline supplies in the U.S., hurricanes Katrina and Rita, and tighter gasoline supplies in the U.S. again.

What we exposed at that time was the lack of refining capacity, which is really interesting because the Competition Bureau said it could not find collusion in the industry but the industry does not necessarily need that. Because of the vertical integration between the companies, there does not even need to be an orchestrated plan. Things basically level out for themselves. There would be a lack of competition and, hence, a lack of
accountability.

I will point to one of the most interesting cases seen in this country. In my opinion, it was when Petro-Canada closed down its Oakville operations. When it closed the Oakville operations, it could have reinvested in that refining capacity and kept more refinement of gasoline products in Canada. It is important that we recognize that this is not only for the industry in terms of driving a vehicle and so forth, it is also important for our
plastics and a whole series of industrial usages.

At any rate, when it decided not to invest in that particular operation, it decided to ship into Canada gasoline from Esso from Europe. There is no real competition in that situation. When we go to Petro-Canada and we are getting gasoline that has been refined from Esso, there is no real impetus for competition.

The big change that we have seen is a continuous speculation and a whole series of stock market surges that have cost Canadians and the price has gone up. But what we have also seen is the usage of the substance, in terms of oil and gasoline, by other countries that has actually drive up the requirements. What that has resulted in, which is important to the debate here tonight, is that it has put a petro-dollar impact on the Canadian currency.

We have seen this industry’s growth move really at a lightning pace, in many respects. It has moved further and faster, and we have seen the need required more elsewhere. The casualty has been on the manufacturing sector as we are basically entering into this fast-paced exportation that has driven our Canadian dollar up significantly.

What has that meant? Since January of this year, we have lost 60,000 manufacturing jobs. In the last three years, we have lost around 250,000 manufacturing jobs. That is because the dollar, which was down around 60¢ and was probably a bit too low and maybe should have been around 70¢, has been driven to over a dollar in the U.S. right now. It is a myth for us to say that all the jobs in manufacturing are moving to Mexico, China, India, or some other place without paying due attention.

I can tell members right now that I am losing jobs consistently in my community to the United States, and it is not just the wage issue, which is thrown out as an excuse from time to time. It is the fact that the dollar and our manufacturing strategy have been undermined so rapidly right now that there has not been the adjustment period necessary.

What we have is cases like we heard about today on Radio-Canada where in New Brunswick a trucking industry has decided that it is actually going to have to close down. It has 35 trucks with which it provides goods and services across New Brunswick and other parts of the east coast, and it can no longer afford to fuel its vehicles. Before, the gas companies would give it a longer period of time to recoup its operational expenses. Now they have limited it to seven days and that has cost the industry. If the trucking
industry tries to get a line of credit at a bank, it cannot get it because the bank says that with the volatility of gas prices, it is not going to lend the money.

What does that mean? That means that this industry is now folding. Ironically, I am sure that the Irving empire is going to be very happy because the fact of the matter is that it will have more of a monopolistic venture because it has a trucking industry. So, we have lost out on competition, as well.

That is why we are calling for a public inquiry. We are calling for other things too, like an ombudsman office, to start things, a clearing house, so that, for example, Canadians can actually receive some accountability.

Just recently Measurement Canada actually had a study, which had to be released through a freedom of information request, that said that 5% of the pumps failed across this country and they failed across this country 75% of the time in favour of the companies. How is it possible that Measurement Canada would not even come out with that information and table it in the House of Commons for Canadians? There is no accountability whatsoever.

We do not even know if anyone has been charged because of all those pumps that were actually misleading Canadians. Interestingly, it was also identified that many of those pumps have actually not even been tested in the last seven to eight years, and these are things that are used routinely every single day.

We have an industry with record profits, as a result of a windfall from this government in terms of actually getting funds out of a budget to 2015, that cannot even keep in order the mechanisms that actually distribute its product. It is hosing Canadians, literally.

I say it is time for accountability on a couple of fronts. Let consumers get the support they need through an independent government institution and, at the same time, let us debate what we are doing with regard to our national commodity here because this is Canada’s national commodity and it is costing other types of industry. We cannot pretend to ignore that. We cannot pretend this is going to go away because we are losing good value-added jobs when we do not have to.

Mr. Brian Masse:
Mr. Speaker, I remember those days with my colleague as we went around this issue. He is absolutely correct. What really needs to be understood is that Canada is unique in saying that this is about market forces and there is nothing we can do. We are one of the few countries in the world that actually says and does that.

Even the United States has a system in place that President Bush has utilized to put more oil on the market to intervene directly and do what he wants, which is to lower the price of gasoline for consumers. Even in the capitalist United States, the president is willing to intervene to try to lower prices in the free market commodity system.

He does that with the knowledge that many people in the communities he represents are facing high prices. It is a very temporal thing, but at least they have a reserve system. My colleague from Western Arctic also mentioned Canada not having any of that capacity, but those tools are there and are being exercised by other nations. Whether they are weak or strong is another debate, but they are there.

We are unique in basically throwing up our hands and saying that we are sorry but we cannot help because it is too complicated, we do not understand it, and we do not care. The reality here is that the government does not want to deal with the real issue. It is an easy way to run an economy right now: to take stuff up, send it out and ship it out. The hard work happens when Canadians go to school to learn skilled trades, like they do in my riding for tool and die and mould making, but then cannot compete when the dollar has risen so fast that the plants are closing down and moving elsewhere. Canadians have done their part. It is time for the government to do its part.

Now, I will never step up and defend any oil company. I don’t think they are very fair in their business dealings. And I would stand next to MP Masse in opposing any inproprieties in their business dealings. However, the writing has been on the wall for years that gas prices are rising and we must prepare for that. When Masse states that “(e)ven in the capitalist United States, the president is willing to intervene to try to lower prices in the free market commodity system. He does that with the knowledge that many people in the communities he represents are facing high prices.”, we know that something is amiss. Regardless of how politically unpopular it is not to further subsidize gasoline prices, it is absolutely necessary to do so, and MP Masse really needs to realize that.

But of course, I can say that because I am no longer siding with one particular political party - even though the one I was a member of did just that.

Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Ma.gnolia
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • Technorati
  • StumbleUpon

Tags: ,

10 Readers left Feedback


  1. Guliano Siciliano on Wednesday, May 28, 2008 at 9:14 am reply Reply

    Chris,

    In this century, we will need to make some fundamental changes in our way of life and how we live. Changes in urban development, change in transportation, change in energy consumption, change in energy sources.

    Trains, light rail (street cars), subway systems, will need to be relied on to reduce cost and make travel easier, more efficient and cost effective.

    Growing up in Windsor, riding my bicycle is what I did as a kid (up to 18 yrs. old) and for fun. After the age of 17, riding my bike was something I would do just for fun. Never did it cross my mind (or anyone else I knew) to ride my bike to work or as my main mode of transportation. The car is king and that was that.

    Anyways, I agree. Rising gas prices is a strong motivator to get people into thinking and making ideas such as SCALEDOWN more appealing and bring more people and support for this movement.

    Even if government helps, at best it will be a small band-aid on a huge problem.

    1. Chris on Wednesday, May 28, 2008 at 9:39 am reply Reply

      I realize that Brian is a bright guy, and by lobbying hard to keep gasoline prices artificially low he is pandering for votes. He knows better and it must be an internal struggle for him. That doesn’t let them off the hook in their double-speak of save-the-environment-as-long-as-it-is-politically-expediant, though. We really need true leadership in these trying times, and to have a leader stand up and risk the slings and arrows of saying unpopular-but-necessary things would be like a light shining down from heaven.

      Which is why I put my time in on the outside instead of in. We can speak the truth as we understand it and not get bogged down in the pig-stye of political posturing.

      Contrary to my wish to keep my Ford paycheques flowing: high gas prices is precisely what is needed to turn things around.

      1. Sporto on Wednesday, May 28, 2008 at 10:30 am reply Reply

        Heres a case where a city councilor is taking initiative - - Hamilton is already talking with the feds to get some light rail in their city..

        http://www.raisethehammer.org/blog.asp?id=1012

        I always thought Windsor is only half a step behind hamilton - industry, population wise, etc…..Can you imagine one of our councilors, let alone an MPP, taking this kind of initiave???

  2. Urbanrat on Wednesday, May 28, 2008 at 9:46 am reply Reply

    What Bush, the US Congress, the US Senate don’t tell you, is that subsidies to the oil industry in the U.S. are still continuing and will continue regardless of what windfall profit they are taking now. I also got Masse’s missive this morning and quickly dismissed it as pandering, fishing for votes type etc.

  3. James Coulter on Wednesday, May 28, 2008 at 12:57 pm reply Reply

    I’ll see your councillor and raise you a mayor/congressional candidate;-)

    http://local.theoildrum.com/node/4057

    The Mayor of Huntington Beach, California raises some interesting points. Our politicians have got to acknowledge the need to rethink our city and how it runs.
    What will the legal liability be in a fatality accident if we only have half the emergency vehicles running because of fuel costs or budget cuts to personelle and equipment to offset rising fuel costs?
    A smaller, denser urban footprint will be cheaper to service and be more cost-effective per tax-payer.

    Let’s start a movement for Tecumseh and Lasalle to annex some big chunks of Windsor.

  4. Urbanrat on Wednesday, May 28, 2008 at 4:32 pm reply Reply

    And she also sites James Kunstler’s, The Psychology of Previous Investment; The Suburbia Project, which is funny becasue the link to his article in her blog, is to Raise The Hammer from Hamilton, Ontario. Just when we might need more public transit in Windsor, let’s forget about better for now, Transit Windsor might have to idle some buses during the day on certain routes because diesiel fuel has gone throught the roof! Imagine the fireman passing the hat to those standing around watching them put out a fire, to get gas money to get back to the station!

    With property values dropping faster than a lead balloon in Michigan, communities in the state are now worrying about the drop in property taxes, which will affect how they can operate in the near future, as the mayor of Huntington Beach has pointedly pointed out!

    The Reckoning is Coming!

  5. Zee on Thursday, May 29, 2008 at 3:11 pm reply Reply

    I’ll be honest. This is one of the best blogs I read in last few months. Unfortunately, Mr. Brian is right in every segment that he provided, but who is listening anyway. I’m sorry to say, but we have a very, very weak Government. The Government that instead facing problems, running away from them, and Oil companies; who else trust those “suckers” anyway? There are always excuses. In the beginning those excuses were on huge scales such as: “9/11, War in Iraq, Hurricane in Gulf area…” . Now every accident is excuse such as: Terrorists destroyed 100 yards of Gas pipe somewhere in Iraq, Iran has nuclear BOMB (yea, yea like Iraq’s Bio ammunition) , China’s earthquake, war in Darfur…

    Anyway I’m sick of excuses, while huge companies swimming in pools and pools of money and money and money….(Everything looks like big Worldwide ENRON)

  6. Josh on Thursday, May 29, 2008 at 4:45 pm reply Reply

    I know that New Urbanism is the hip thing to do now, but moving out East has really opened my eyes. If everyone is moving into the cities, their nice walkable, mixed use neighbourhoods, who is going to produce the food to feed all those cities? More over, who is going to allow distributed power generation in their gentrified cityscape? Even in my sprawling subdivision (nearly .5 acres for most homes), putting up a wind turbine requires a ream of paperwork that, in and of itself, probably kills off more trees than I can carbon offset with my windmill. (An exaggeration, but you get the drift).

    I’m all for gasoline prices compelling innovation into sustainable development, although I am a little worried that, inspite of record, or new record, high gas prices since Katrina, we have not yet seen the 70’s type investments or changes in legislation to spur sustainable development. In fact, what I am seeing is a who lot of “eco-warrior” buy-in to the gasoline price gouging as a way to force their ideals while oil companies laugh all the way to the World Bank.

    Let me tell you a little about PEI. Heating oil costs $1.17 a litre, while gas is $1.30. Even in a small province, population and geographically speaking, we still invest heavily in alternative energy production. That doesn’t stop our electricity rates from being $.125 a kwh. In a province where the heating season can last as long as 8 months (I’m not kidding, it’s the end of May and I’ve only seen 2 days above 20C out here!), people are not buying their eco-friendly coffee, their organically, locally grown vegetables. They are headed off to Wal-Mart to buy the lowest cost essentials that they possibly can. Luxuries are out. It is, for most people, even those with dual incomes, a situation where every expense is scrutinized. Next winter, when temperatures drop to 30 below and the North winds howl down off the Atlantic ocean people will be choosing between food and oil. The urban poor will be some of the hardest hit, right after the rural poor.

    So, what the hell is my point? Rising gas prices may allow some to push through an agenda that had been stagnating for the past 50 years, but it doesn’t make it the right solution for everyone and it certainly won’t solve the problems of the world. Let’s not be so quick to judge those that choose to make rural living a way of life, not just a lifestyle. Yes, sprawling villas and SUVs are infringing on rural landscape, but your local farmer doesn’t like it anymore than your local eco-warrior.

    (I’ll get off my soapbox now.)

  7. Mark Boscariol on Thursday, May 29, 2008 at 5:47 pm reply Reply

    Here’s one where I disagree with Chris

    What difference willl a 10-20c gas tax make in behaviour where we’ve seen that its taken a doubling in price to affect behaviour?

    Why tax gas when natural market forces are already taking care of the problem?

    If you tax gas a few pennies and then behavior changes because of the already doubling market prices will those who favour gov’t intervention take credit?

    I believe that thinking that the government can solve our problems is naive.

    The NDP are already on record against carbon taxes because they believe that they disproportionately affect the poor.

    As far as the oil company’s go, we should get more royalties and limit their campaign contributions, other than that there is no point in demonizing them.

    There’s some pretty darn big Canadian hypocracy going on here. We won’t build coal plants but we sure don’t mind selling our coal to china for it to be burned and complain when the emissions travel back to us over BC

    If we’re so against Coal then we should not just stop burning it we should mine it.

    80% of china’s energy comes from coal The U.S. sits on the worlds largest coal reserves.

    How much ya wanna bet we’re going coal within two years. I’ll betcha the big marketing campaigns are on the drawing boards as we speak.

    And were fiddling with some gas taxes while we send shiploads of coal to china?

    1. Chris on Friday, May 30, 2008 at 8:22 am reply Reply

      I think you’re mistaking my argument with someone else’s, Mark. I don’t think the government will help, nor do I demonize the oil companies. My point was that while this NDP MP speaks out for keeping the price of gasoline artificially low (and speaks out against a carbon tax as you mentioned) they try and position themselves as being the best party to choose when it comes to environmental protection. That is Orwellian double-speak which panders for votes, not for the health of our environment.

      I agree with most of your argument, except the gas-tax one We need to recoup some of the costs that automotive transportation is inflicting on our communities (since motorists don’t even come close to paying their fair share), whether that’s where this tax money is going or not is still undetermined. I don’t trust politicians as far as I can throw them, but a properly allocated gas-tax is actually something to shoot for. It should be used to invest in a more sustainable method of transportation as well as alleviate some of the consequences of an auto-centric transportation policy.

      Until we see Adam Smith’s “invisible hand of the market” wipe away subsidies across the board, this is the best we can hope for.

Feedback Form


 

clear